If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Yankee Fan in Boston

Because I've yet to see a case of tendonitis that took more than a season to cure, which is when the financial ramifications for replacing him and not being able to sign Granderson, et al, would be relevant.

By the way, I've never ignored the fact that there is more of a risk with young pitchers, although I have been intrigued by the idea that some posters on here assume there is no risk with Montero. Montero is probably the safer pick, but there is more upside with Pineda, and a bit of the Pineda risk is mitigated by the fact that he's already had a successful season under his belt.

I'm not talking about the tendinitis. That's just an example of my point. Jake Peavy, Fransisco Liriano, Wood, Prior, Ben Sheets, Rich Harden... Baseball is full of young flash in the pan pitchers. More upside with Pineda is debatable. Best case scenario for both is probably Miggy Cabrera Vs Justin Verlander.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by BennyTheJetRodriguez

I'm not talking about the tendinitis. That's just an example of my point. Jake Peavy, Fransisco Liriano, Wood, Prior, Ben Sheets, Rich Harden... Baseball is full of young flash in the pan pitchers. More upside with Pineda is debatable. Best case scenario for both is probably Miggy Cabrera Vs Justin Verlander.

Sure, but it's a lot harder to acquire a Verlander -- the Yankees over the last decade (and the FA market in general) show that it's a lot easier (relatively) to acquire a middle-of-the-order hitter than a frontline starter.

And the idea of worrying that he's going to have a long-term inury and somehow factoring that in at this point would make the whole exercise of trying to acquire pitching self-defeating.

"Welcome to NYYFans, the place where Yankees fans come together to complain about the manner in which our team is winning games" -- Mr. Coffee

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Yankee Fan in Boston

Sure, but it's a lot harder to acquire a Verlander -- the Yankees over the last decade (and the FA market in general) show that it's a lot easier (relatively) to acquire a middle-of-the-order hitter than a frontline starter.

And the idea of worrying that he's going to have a long-term inury and somehow factoring that in at this point would make the whole exercise of trying to acquire pitching self-defeating.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

on January 13 you deal your best prospect for a kid who doesn't have to report to Tampa until the 3rd week in February...and they didn't follow up on the kid to make sure he was in shape for P&C?

he wasn't in your organization. you don't know the kid. so you're going to trust his arm to just 'be there'?

seems to me that with a modicum of diligence the Yankees could've got out in front of this thing.

it's not Cashman's job to assume a 23 year old will do what's best for the team. just seems to me a lack of oversight perhaps created this blindspot..

You make a legitimate point. They traded their top prospect plus Noesi and seemed to be completely blindsided when he showed up to camp 20Lbs overweight and out of shape a month after the trade was made. We don't have enough information or know everything that was said so its probably not fair to kill Cashman. However, I have a question that begs to be answered. Did Pineda gain all of this weight and get out of shape between the time the trade was made (1/13) and 4 weeks later when camp opened? I'm assuming the physical included taking his weight. Did this raise red flags?

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Yankee Fan in Boston

I said "middle of the order." And the answer to that is yes.

As Benny said, those comparisons are best case -- either player will be lucky to hit it.

well it's either Cabrera for Verlander or Middle of the order hitter vs #1 or 2 pitcher. The way I see it it's a draw with Pineda being the bigger risk. I think, based on Campos being thrown in, that this is also how the GMs view the trade.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by BennyTheJetRodriguez

well it's either Cabrera for Verlander or Middle of the order hitter vs #1 or 2 pitcher. The way I see it it's a draw with Pineda being the bigger risk. I think, based on Campos being thrown in, that this is also how the GMs view the trade.

I said the bolded above, because I think it just gets too problematic when you try to compare to a single player.

I think you're forgetting about Noesi, who is going to pitch in the middle of the Mariners rotation at a very cheap price. There's no doubt he added value to their side of the equation, and the risks you speak of with Pineda are multiplied geometrically for Campos.

Most of what I read after the trade favored the Yankees side, just based on the Montero for Pineda swap. And I think a lot of that was based on the rationale that it is easier to acquire middle of the order hitting than top-tier pitchers.

"Welcome to NYYFans, the place where Yankees fans come together to complain about the manner in which our team is winning games" -- Mr. Coffee

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

The standard was set as Verlander vs Cabrera but then to downplay the hitter you use "middle of the order" as the bar?

In that case, I disagree that a "middle of the order" hitter is easier to acquire than a "1-3" pitcher.

Not sure why that's an issue -- it's exactly what I said in the post you originally quoted:

Originally Posted by Yankee Fan in Boston

Sure, but it's a lot harder to acquire a Verlander -- the Yankees over the last decade (and the FA market in general) show that it's a lot easier (relatively) to acquire a middle-of-the-order hitter than a frontline starter.

And the idea of worrying that he's going to have a long-term inury and somehow factoring that in at this point would make the whole exercise of trying to acquire pitching self-defeating.

And I'd say the Yankees have had much great success at acquiring guys like A-Rod, Tex and Granderson than guys like CC, and that players like Pujols and Fielder are much more likely to come onto the FA market than pitchers who you'd want to use to start the first game of the playoffs.

"Welcome to NYYFans, the place where Yankees fans come together to complain about the manner in which our team is winning games" -- Mr. Coffee

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

The Yanks could have acquired either Pujols or Fielder, but there wasn't a need because they already had a (former) elite 1B. Santana/Sabathia/Lee types hit FA once every 3-5 years, whereas you can potentially acquire an elite bat every offseason.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by BennyTheJetRodriguez

well it's either Cabrera for Verlander or Middle of the order hitter vs #1 or 2 pitcher. The way I see it it's a draw with Pineda being the bigger risk. I think, based on Campos being thrown in, that this is also how the GMs view the trade.

There are other factors like: Did Cashman manage all of his assets wisely this winter? When you consider the depth of starting pitching at AAA, and the lack of depth where hitters like Montero are concerned, you can view the trade as a huge gamble on the Yankees part. I was not the only person to notice this after the trade happened. Does Montero have the black plague or is he cancer to the department? Why do the Yankees seem to always wait until a prospect is ripe for Major League production before cutting them loose?

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Tom Finnigan

There are other factors like: Did Cashman manage all of his assets wisely this winter? When you consider the depth of starting pitching at AAA, and the lack of depth where hitters like Montero are concerned, you can view the trade as a huge gamble on the Yankees part. I was not the only person to notice this after the trade happened. Does Montero have the black plague or is he cancer to the department? Why do the Yankees seem to always wait until a prospect is ripe for Major League production before cutting them loose?

Obviously Pineda was viewed (rightly) as a lot more than just depth. You aren't winning the AL East with just depth, you need great players. Just because Adam Warren is around to pitch 6 likely mediocre innings with little potential for improvement doesn't mean pitching isn't a big need

Also, that last sentence... come on man. You are asking why the Yankees trade prospects at the height of their value? logic this one out. Also, it makes absolutely no sense, as Montero was offered for 2 different aces previously

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Jace

Obviously Pineda was viewed (rightly) as a lot more than just depth. You aren't winning the AL East with just depth, you need great players. Just because Adam Warren is around to pitch 6 likely mediocre innings with little potential for improvement doesn't mean pitching isn't a big need

Also, that last sentence... come on man. You are asking why the Yankees trade prospects at the height of their value? logic this one out. Also, it makes absolutely no sense, as Montero was offered for 2 different aces previously

With the offense the Yankees have, I believe they can survive a season in transition with young guys making up the bulk of the staff (without someone like Pineda). Something the Rays seem to do very successfully. I guess the Yankees feel they don;t want to take that chance. As for why Cashman kept offering Montero up for Pitching? Instant gratification seems to me to run the roost and has for many years.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Tom Finnigan

With the offense the Yankees have, I believe they can survive a season in transition with young guys making up the bulk of the staff (without someone like Pineda). Something the Rays seem to do very successfully.

Your points are qualitative/anecdotal and don't really make any sense. The Rays' pitching is great (2nd in league ERA last year by .01 runs), and their offense isn't (8th in the AL last year in runs), they stand completely in opposition to your point. Youth is very far secondary to talent

Originally Posted by Tom Finnigan

As for why Cashman kept offering Montero up for Pitching? Instant gratification seems to me to run the roost and has for many years.

So, since you didn't address it at all, you must agree with me that your point about the Yankees "only trading their prospects when they are ML ready" made zero sense. And if "instant gratification" means getting a star pitcher for a very good hitting prospect with suspect defense, every smart Yankee fan signs up right away

This all smacks of "i feel negative and i have agendas to feed, so im going to aimlessly complain" since you are talking incoherently in circles

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Originally Posted by Jace

Your points are qualitative/anecdotal and don't really make any sense. The Rays' pitching is great (2nd in league ERA last year by .01 runs), and their offense isn't (8th in the AL last year in runs), they stand completely in opposition to your point. Youth is very far secondary to talent

So, since you didn't address it at all, you must agree with me that your point about the Yankees "only trading their prospects when they are ML ready" made zero sense. And if "instant gratification" means getting a star pitcher for a very good hitting prospect with suspect defense, every smart Yankee fan signs up right away

This all smacks of "i feel negative and i have agendas to feed, so im going to aimlessly complain" since you are talking incoherently in circles

Yes, they probably are qualitative/anecdotal points, I'm opinionated for sure. So what this is a fan blog, everything need not be data points in an analytical sense. On the Rays pitching, Matt Moore stands in opposition to your point. The rest of the staff is home grown, and regardless of the Rays financial circumstances, they have made it work for them. I think the Yankees have the same level of talent in the minors, but rarely use it to their advantage. And no, not all of their picks are high, there are plenty of articles out there on the Internet dispelling that myth. My point was to highlight the fact that the Pineda trade was not needed. Now as a result, we have Ibanez when we could have had a cost controlled Montero for a very long time. Nothing like creating a leak in the boat when there wasn't one before.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

Greinke, then. If nothing else, I think that would make for some fine theatre.

He's not under 30, but it sounds like there's an outside shot that the Angels may not pick up Haren's option at the end of the year.

I would be surprised if either (a bit less so on Greinke) hit the FA market. Or if they do left their teams. I think Milwaukee will be able to afford Greinke having passed on Prince and I don't see money being an issue with the Angels. While it is possible one may reach the market, top pitchers like that are far fewer available than good hitters. We just saw two of the most prolific hitters (Fielder, Pujols) change teams this off-season alone.

Re: 2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

The guy has tendnitis and is on the 15 day DL. Last I knew that wasn't a career-threatening injury.

No it ususally is not. And guys often come back from it just fine after a few weeks rest and a build up of arm strength.

But sometimes it is a precursor to a more serious shoulder injury that can be career changing or threatening. Now is not the time to panic on Pineda, but it is very reasonable to question if the injury is "just tendonitis" that will clear up "soon" or the start of a cycle of shoulder injuries leading to surgery down the road. Odds are good it is the former but you never know. especailly given the velocity drop that preceeded teh diagnosis.